Law Students

So Amazing, I Can?t Think of a Pithy Title.

By Dr. Bombay

Sometimes, legislation comes along that blows your mind. You know the type: devoid of any practical considerations and fodder for hundreds of lawsuits. There always seems to be an uptick in this silliness in election years, presumably to motivate single issue voters to head to the polls.

For shear, unbridled lack of consideration of consequences, Colorado’s Proposed Amendment 48 takes the cake. The text of the initiative reads as follows:

?An Amendment to the Colorado constitution defining the term ?person? to include any human being from the moment of fertilization as ?person? is used in those provisions of the Colorado constitution relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice, and due process of law.?

Wow.

Now this is not a criticism of anyone?s conception of life, but the legal implications of this are staggering. As Gail Schoettler points out in an editorial in today?s Denver Post, this law would effectively make any medical treatments for pregnant women that may kill the fetus illegal, and would criminalize most (if not all) types of contraceptive pills and IUD?s (which prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall), and in vitro fertilization (as fertilized eggs are often discarded after a successful pregnancy). As if couples who are struggling to get pregnant don?t have enough to worry about.

Plus, what about property rights? If a fertilized egg is a ?person,? does that toss the rule against perpetuities out the window? Can a frozen, fertilized egg in a lab freezer somewhere inherit your house?

What does anyone make of this?

Full post as published by Fight The Hypo on September 16, 2008 (boomark / email).